Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Businesses United States

Arizona "Papers, Please" Law May Hit Tech Workers 1590

Posted by kdawson
from the don't-know-jack-boots dept.
dcblogs writes "H-1B workers and foreign students may think twice about attending school or working in Arizona as a result of the state's new immigration law. If a police officer has a 'reasonable suspicion' about the immigration status of someone, the officer may ask to see proof of legal status. Federal immigration law requires all non-US citizens, including H-1B workers, to carry documentation, but 'no state until Arizona has made it a crime to not have that paperwork on your person,' said immigration lawyer Sarah Hawk. It means that an H-1B holder risks detention every time they make a 7-11 run if they don't have their papers, or if their paperwork is out of date because US immigration authorities are behind in processing (which condition does not make them illegal). The potential tech backlash over the law may have begun yesterday with a call by San Francisco City Atty. Dennis Herrera 'to adopt and implement a sweeping boycott of the State of Arizona and Arizona-based businesses.'"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Arizona "Papers, Please" Law May Hit Tech Workers

Comments Filter:
  • by NewtonsLaw (409638) on Tuesday April 27, 2010 @07:49PM (#32006332)

    Whatever happened to "presumed innocent until proven guilty"?

    Has anyone else noticed that laws seem to be slowly changing to produce a presumption of guilt (requiring a proof of innocence) these days?

    • by peterofoz (1038508) on Wednesday April 28, 2010 @12:03AM (#32008956) Homepage Journal
      Getting arrested or detained does not make you guilty. You'll still have your day in court or clear things up at the station.Think of it like a beefed up curfew law for minors.
      • by lena_10326 (1100441) on Wednesday April 28, 2010 @12:12AM (#32009030) Homepage
        Given that you'll probably serve 3+ months in jail waiting to find out that you are indeed innocent still feels like a 3+ month prison sentence no matter how you spin it.
        • by clarkkent09 (1104833) * on Wednesday April 28, 2010 @01:13AM (#32009728)
          Please don't exaggerate if you haven't read the law. The new Arizona law is essentially the same as the existing federal law that is not being enforced. The law gives police the right to ask for papers ONLY when they lawfully stop somebody. They CANNOT walk up to a random person on the street and check their immigration status. However, for example in case of traffic violation or something like that they can.
          • by lena_10326 (1100441) on Wednesday April 28, 2010 @02:37AM (#32010560) Homepage

            They CANNOT walk up to a random person on the street and check their immigration status.

            Right. Tell that to these people: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m7F49dUaZMw [youtube.com] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DMDW4Fszj2U [youtube.com] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FQLFITnwgDI [youtube.com] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lmPi2GbbUes [youtube.com] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Udf1tY3Fl2U [youtube.com] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=frL6rRbGAdw [youtube.com]

            However, for example in case of traffic violation or something like that they can.

            http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6wXkI4t7nuc [youtube.com] Fast forward to about 3/4's through. An experienced cop admitting that when he followed a car long enough he could make a legal stop because at some point everyone makes a mistake. (I presume feeling nervous that a cop has been following you the last 8 blocks also doesn't help one's situation.)

            • by dkleinsc (563838) on Wednesday April 28, 2010 @08:36AM (#32012780) Homepage

              An experienced cop admitting that when he followed a car long enough he could make a legal stop because at some point everyone makes a mistake. (I presume feeling nervous that a cop has been following you the last 8 blocks also doesn't help one's situation.)

              It's definitely nervewracking, I can tell you that. I've been in that very position, not because I was non-white but because my car was a bit beat up and I had longish hair at the time, and I'm pretty sure the cop had decided that I didn't belong in his small suburb.

              The basic picture: I saw the cop start to pull up behind me, and I was going about 40 in a 30 mph zone (which everyone else does too: it's a rural area that has no business having a speed limit so low), so I slow down to 35. The officer continued to pull up behind me, and I slowed to the speed limit. I gave him opportunities to pass just in case he was just trying to get by me, which he didn't take. I took a somewhat less direct route out of town, following every traffic law to the letter (including things like signaling 100 ft before a turn) and making a few turns. He followed me every step of the way until I left his jurisdiction.

              Now imagine having to drive like that all the time, and you'll know what a Hispanic person in Arizona needs to do to avoid getting stopped.

          • by edumacator (910819) on Wednesday April 28, 2010 @05:06AM (#32011414)

            They CANNOT walk up to a random person on the street and check their immigration status.

            You must not know a lot of cops. What you are saying is technically true, but if someone who appears to be Hispanic, and they swerve ever so slightly in their lane, the cops can and often will stop them for that minor infraction, so that they can check their status. The cops I know in Georgia don't do this for immigration purposes, but if you drink a few beers with them, they'll admit to stopping Hispanics because they have a higher likelihood of carrying drugs.

            Laws like this are meant to give the police HUGE latitude in stopping someone. They are also targeting a group that doesn't have the wherewithal to hire a good lawyer to invalidate the original stop.

          • by Xenographic (557057) on Wednesday April 28, 2010 @06:01AM (#32011726) Homepage Journal

            > They CANNOT walk up to a random person on the street and check their immigration status.

            Wrong. We have a stop & identify statute. They can use that to check on anyone they want.
            See also: the sweeps that are performed whenever our sheriff is up for reelection.

            • by clarkkent09 (1104833) * on Wednesday April 28, 2010 @06:55AM (#32012036)
              The point is that the law essentially doesn't give any major new powers to the police except to enable them check somebody's immigration status when they are dealing with that person anyway. There used to be a common and ridiculous situation where a van full of obvious illegals, no ids, no english, would be stopped and as long as they weren't caught in the act of crossing the border and as long as the driver had a valid license, the cops couldn't do anything. Yes some cops abuse their powers, but they do that anyway. That's a separate battle.
        • by Foobar of Borg (690622) on Wednesday April 28, 2010 @01:33AM (#32009934)

          Next person who types "NO CARRIER" as a punchline will be mercilessly bludgeoned.

          Ha! You wouldn't dare bludgeon someone who us)*(&@EKJn^ [NO CARRIER]

      • by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 28, 2010 @12:20AM (#32009130)

        Arizona is just enforcing fed law:

        (d) Every alien in the United States who has been registered and fingerprinted under the provisions of the Alien Registration Act, 1940, or under the provisions of this Act shall be issued a certificate of alien registration or an alien registration receipt card in such form and manner and at such time as shall be prescribed under regulations issued by the Attorney General.

        (e) Every alien, eighteen years of age and over, shall at all times carry with him and have in his personal possession any certificate of alien registration or alien registration receipt card issued to him pursuant to subsection (d).

        http://www.uscis.gov/ilink/docView/SLB/HTML/SLB/0-0-0-1/0-0-0-29/0-0-0-8289.html

        If we are not going to enforce the laws, take them off the books.

        • by Achromatic1978 (916097) <robert@chromablue . n et> on Wednesday April 28, 2010 @12:38AM (#32009348)
          Speaking as someone who is "in between" (I have a 2 year green card, which is in the process of 'removing limitations', i.e. being issued as a 10 year green card), there are things you should know:
          1. Backups are so bad that you are advised to send in your paperwork four to five months before your current papers expire. They will not accept paperwork more than six months prior. However, tThis is no guarantee that your new ones will be issued by the expiry. Indeed you might find yourself waiting an additional YEAR or more after expiry before new cards are issued
          2. During this time, you are "on a stay authorized by the Attorney General", in essence, "until your application is accepted or declined". However, this status is not one of record. You will get a letter from USCIS stating that your application is in process, and that this letter does not suffice as a visa, etc, etc. If you contact USCIS, you will be told that you can NOT get a letter confirming that you are in that period - that, essentially, you are at the mercy of the various bureaucracies and service centers.
          3. Do you know that if you are a foreigner who wishes to marry a US citizen, it is both QUICKER /and/ CHEAPER for you to come here on a tourist visa, sign a waiver saying you have no intention of marrying a citizen, get married anyway, and fill out a visa application that basically says "Oops. Can I stay anyway?" than it is for you to actually go through the process the "proper" way? Just one of the reasons immigration is ... "problematic".
          4. Despite having paid nearly $1000 two years ago for "processing" (just part of the nearly $15,000 my immigration has cost me in fees and direct expenses alone, not counting airfares, moving, etc) and biometrics, you now get stung for another biometrics to the tune of a few hundred dollars (in case, for example, your fingerprints have changed...)

          So, really, fuck you Arizona - through no fault of my own, you feel entitled to detain me because of the failings of the government system? Because I can't get documentation of my status?

          Blah.

          • by Sycraft-fu (314770) on Wednesday April 28, 2010 @01:14AM (#32009738)

            While I'm not at all a fan of this bill, what you are talking about is a completely separate issue. If the US has a fucked up immigration system, and it does, then it needs to fix it. The answer isn't just "Let's ignore problems because the system is fucked up."

            That is actually a large way that we've gotten in to the current mess with illegal immigration. A non-trivial amount of the population does not seem to want a solution, they just want to ignore things. They don't seem to want to forward solutions, such as streamlining the process, reducing costs, having work visas, etc, they just want to allow things to continue illegally. That is a bad situation. Fix the system, don't ignore the problem.

            So same shit here. There are reasons to be mad at Arizona about this law, but that because the federal government sucks at the paperwork is not one of them. The paperwork should be done properly and if ti isn't the feds are who to be mad at.

            • by MartinSchou (1360093) on Wednesday April 28, 2010 @05:59AM (#32011718)

              There IS a reason to be upset with Arizona for this law. They are punishing people for something they cannot possibly fix or even rectify. It's not as if the Arizona state legislature doesn't know this is an issue.

              Imagine this situation:
              You're arrested for whatever trivial reason. The phone system is down, so you can't get to call your own lawyer, so you're assigned a court appointed one. Once in court, your lawyer suffers a stroke, but the court don't want to waste its time arranging for you to get another lawyer, and not only convicts you of whatever you were arrested for, but also holds you in contempt of court for wasting its time because your lawyer had a stroke.

              You have no way of influencing the things that get screwed up. Same with the green card system. You apply in time, you're told that while they're working on it, you can stay, but you have no paperwork showing they're working on it, so you can be arrested and deported (to Mexico? who will then deport you to somewhere else for not having a VISA). Now you've been arrested and left the country, so your green card might not be approved. And it will make it impossible for you to come back.

              So yeah ... a state deciding to punish the victims of Federal incompetence is quite immoral. What next? Jailing and deporting women who have been kidnapped, raped and transported to a foreign country against their will to be sold off as sex slaves? Oh ... right ... maybe Arizona's taking a page out of the Danish rulebook.

          • by Low Ranked Craig (1327799) on Wednesday April 28, 2010 @01:42AM (#32010024)
            Sounds like you have a problem with the federal immigration system, just like Arizona does.
          • by Loki_1929 (550940) on Wednesday April 28, 2010 @01:55AM (#32010136) Journal

            I don't think anyone disputes that current US immigration procedures and handling are pretty well screwed up. That, however, does not change the fact that we have 12 - 20 million people here illegally who are (per laws and policies) to be found and booted from the country. As our Federal government is more interested in granting amnesty to law-breakers in this area of the law than it is in actually enforcing the law, the state of Arizona has decided that it has had enough of what is - by any measure - a full-scale invasion.

            Ideally, I would like to see all our immigration policies and procedures overhauled so that everyone coming in legally is able to do so with as little trouble and expense as possible while everyone trying to come here illegally is either prevented from doing so or is quickly located and deported. Unfortunately, far too many in Congress want to tie making your life easier with giving tens of millions of illegal alien invaders amnesty and citizenship as a reward for violating our sovereign borders and ignoring our laws. Considering the fact that these illegal alien invaders are now kidnapping US citizens and have been raping and murdering our citizens en masse for decades, and considering the fact that the drug cartels from Mexico are now extending their wars across our borders, you're just going to have to wait until we can get the idiots in Congress to fix the legal immigration system.

            Your beef is not with Arizona, but with the US Federal government. It is not Arizona's fault that the Federal government is leaving you in limbo. It is not Arizona's fault that the Federal government isn't providing you with up-to-date status paperwork. You and I have two common enemies in this fight: the Federal government that's basically screwing you while leaving my country's borders insecured in the middle of one of the largest invasions in history and the illegal immigrants who are flooding into the country without bothering to go through the process you've been working with (because you apparently care about following the law and respecting this country - two concepts utterly foreign to illegals) who have forced Arizona into this position.

            If the citizens of Arizona weren't under constant threat from drug cartels and other criminal aliens, and if there weren't an ongoing invasion of the country that's overwhelming our social services and draining our economy, then I'd say we shouldn't resort to states doing things like this just yet as it's really the responsibility of the Federal government to fix things. However, we're under attack and it requires a more urgent response. We've been waiting for the Federal government to fix the problem of illegals flooding into this country by the millions for decades. It simply isn't happening. Now that our people are being kidnapped, taken away, murdered, etc on the verge of a full-scale drug war spilling into our streets, dealing with the illegals has become the overriding priority.

            You're in the immigration emergency room telling me your foot hurts. I got gunshot victims to deal with first. Will get to you ASAP. Want to improve your situation in the meantime? Get together with a whole bunch of other people who are in favor of fixing the immigration system without amnesty for illegals and get the Feds to fix their broken system. In the meantime, if you're a non-citizen in the US without documentation showing that you're here legally, ya might wanna steer clear of Arizona and several other states considering similar legislation.

          • by sldghmr (1519841) on Wednesday April 28, 2010 @02:18AM (#32010378)
            I live in Arizona. I see your perspective and experience; so here is mine.

            I've lost one vehicle to theft; found weeks later with an illegal alien (from Mexico) behind the wheel. All removable components removed. It was paid off prior and insurance did not cover full price to get a new one though they did pay a lot. But they probably raised everyone who pays insurance a little to cover it so no worries to the illegal immigrants.

            I've been hit twice in hit and runs; luckily I was able to follow them and get police to their location. First time, the police gave them a ticket, told me they were not legal (from Mexico) and to just deal with my insurance. When I asked why they weren't being detained to deport it was due to the city of Phoenix police not being allowed to enforce immigration (this was around '02). Second time, they were detained by the sheriff dept which is all I know, and again it was my insurance that had to pay the tab (see the trend here) each time with me paying deductibles and 100% of aftermarket equip.

            My son was in an accident and his foot was sliced open to the bone. I carried him in to the ER that evening and it was packed wall to wall, no room to stand. We checked in at the desk and then we were asked to step outside and wait because it was safer outside. You see the ER was packed with illegal immigrants who did not have insurance and were using it as a clinic to treat the flu, common colds, strep throat... stuff you take to a regular Dr. So the facilities tax payers have contributed to so its there in the event of an emergency is over-run. A nurse came outside after a half hour and walked us around to a side door where they finally treated my sons foot.

            For states that are not on the border, immigration may not seem like it's a bad problem but for states that are on the border its a huge problem. It's expensive and though activists will tell you otherwise it's a big impact on crime.

            A few points you should understand since you want to be a citizen of the US.
            - Illegal immigrants do not have a right to be here. That's why they call it 'illegal'.
            - It's not the burden of the US for an immigrant to gain citizenship; it's the immigrants burden!
            - This country is losing money fast and illegal immigration costs more each year than the war effort overseas.
            - Many of us already citizens have fought for and killed for this country, possibly close to you right now; it is NOT a good idea to tell us to get fucked.

            I congratulate you for taking the high road and doing whatever it takes to get your citizenship. You seem to be jumping through the hoops and paying for it. It's not easy to be an American is it? It's damned expensive and it doesn't stop when you get the paper either. Maybe you can move to Arizona and help us pay for the illegal immigrants that flood across the border. That would be great! We need all the help we can get.

            Could you imagine living in a state where you have to pass a state law just to make state law enforcement enforce federal laws already in place? Is that not the strangest concept? Honestly I never thought it would pass, the opposition for it is very large. Unfortunately, the lower ranks of law enforcement will probably find a way to abuse it. I hope not though, I sincerely hope that its put to good use and impacts legal citizens and legal immigrants as little as possible.
            • by pydev (1683904) on Wednesday April 28, 2010 @05:05AM (#32011400)

              For states that are not on the border, immigration may not seem like it's a bad problem

              It's pretty sad when even people who oppose illegal migration fall into this trap.

              Immigration is not a problem; immigrants pay, are productive members of society, and get deported if they break any laws.

              The problem is illegal migration. Illegal migration is not immigration. Stop confusing the two.

            • by MartinSchou (1360093) on Wednesday April 28, 2010 @06:15AM (#32011804)

              You see the ER was packed with illegal immigrants who did not have insurance

              Question: Where did these illegal immigrants get money for stuff like food and clothing?

              Are they ALL thieves, drug dealers and such? Or do they possibly work (illegally) in the country? Why aren't anyone punishing the employers who are enabling these illegal immigrants? Why aren't you throwing them in prison for violating the law? Conspiracy to break the law at the very least. Aiding and abetting a criminal.

              Change these charges from misdemeanors to felonies. Throw the responsible parties in jail (including the illegal immigrants), from foremen to CEOs, single citizen hiring maids, gardeners, nannies etc.

              It's supply and demand at work. There's a demand for illegal immigrant workers, because they're cheaper. No need for insurance, lower salaries all round - they aren't going to be paying tax, so you can cut that away from their salary, you can press their salary even more, because they won't complain about working 12-16 hours a day, because that can get them deported etc. And since there's a demand for these workers, and a natural amount of replacement due to deportation, there will be a massive supply of these illegal immigrant workers.

              What is the punishment for hiring illegal immigrant workers at the moment? Is there any kind of punishment at all? As long as it is not only cheaper to hire them, but still cheaper even when you get caught red handed hiring them. Essentially you have a law stating that it is illegal for radioactive waste being stored in kindergartens, but you're just moving the waste and not giving a rats ass about who put it there in the first place. No wonder you have a problem.

              • by Slashdot Parent (995749) on Wednesday April 28, 2010 @12:04PM (#32016220)

                Why aren't anyone punishing the employers who are enabling these illegal immigrants? Why aren't you throwing them in prison for violating the law? [...] Change these charges from misdemeanors to felonies. Throw the responsible parties in jail (including the illegal immigrants), from foremen to CEOs, single citizen hiring maids, gardeners, nannies etc.

                As a small business owner, I think you are asking an awful lot.

                Employers are not Federal Immigration Officials. We simply don't have the ability to determine someone's residency status beyond what we already do (and apparently ICE doesn't do such a stellar job, either [mcclatchydc.com]).

                Don't get me wrong, I have no desire to hire illegals, and I fulfill my requirements with respect to the I-9 form. But if an applicant

                1. Presents me with a false document, I'm never going to know it.
                2. Presents me with documents that don't contain a photo, I have no earthly clue if the applicant is who he or she claims to me. And yes, no photo ID is required for employment: a voter registration card with a social security card will satisfy the I-9 requirements, and it is illegal for me to require more documents. If my gut tells me something is wrong, it is illegal for me to discriminate based on national origin.

                And do you really verify the immigration status of everyone who works on your property? Would you even know how to? My Hispanic maid, handyman, and gardener are business owners, so I remit payment directly to a business (i.e. no I-9 or 1099s need to be completed). I'm guessing that they are legal, but I have no way of knowing for sure, and no way to check.

                I guess where I'm going to with this ramble is that employers are not Government Immigration Officials. Tell us what you want us to do, and we'll do it, but don't get upset when employees figure out how to circumvent the system.

            • by Lakitu (136170) on Wednesday April 28, 2010 @07:52AM (#32012380)

              Unfortunately, the lower ranks of law enforcement will probably find a way to abuse it. I hope not though, I sincerely hope that its put to good use and impacts legal citizens and legal immigrants as little as possible.

              This is the problem with the law. Everyone gets caught up talking about illegal immigrants, but that's not the issue -- if there were a way to deal with illegal immigration without it affecting actual citizens quite so much, it would be done, and that would be that.

              When you're entrusting police officers with powers that you "sincerely hope" will not be abused, you are throwing away the protections of citizenship and removing the burdens we have placed upon government to ensure that we have those protections.

              This law won't "probably" be abused, it WILL be abused, and it will not only target illegal immigrants. If this law actually comes into effect, then every single person in the state should be carrying every kind of identification they have with them at all times, especially if they are of latino or hispanic heritage. You can be a perfectly legit US citizen and get pulled over for speeding and have to deal with the police hassling you because they don't like you. You may think it unlikely, but "sincere hope" isn't enough to ordain the rule of law. You may be white as can be, but if a cop dislikes you, sees your name McPatrick after pulling you over for a minor traffic violation, he could walk his way down the line of questioning to "so you just moved here from Ireland illegaly, eh son?"

              The reason illegal immigration is so hard to deal with is because the USA guarantees protections of its citizens. You can deal with illegal immigration easily, but to do so means giving up those protections!

              The goddamn president of the country can barely present enough proof to satisfy millions of people, many of whom serve in the military or on police forces -- how do you expect a legal US citizen of Mexican descent to do so? This law will not fix the problems you have just complained about, and it will provide legal protections to cops who get self-righteous enough to feel like harassing just about anyone they choose. It's a travesty, and even lending it a scent of legitimacy, let alone speaking out in favor of it, does more harm to this country than any amount of "fighting for and killing" for it could ever achieve. Get off your high horse and stop pretending that it's not so bad since it probably won't affect you. It WILL affect US citizens, and you are just throwing them to the wind with your support of the legislation, no matter how tepid it may be.

              It's a travesty that so many people can seemingly support even the concept of this legislation, let alone an actual state government actually coming so close to putting it into effect. Anyone who supports this law, including you, should be ashamed of themselves.

            • by Lakitu (136170) on Wednesday April 28, 2010 @08:05AM (#32012492)

              I left something out of my original reply.

              You see the ER was packed with illegal immigrants who did not have insurance and were using it as a clinic to treat the flu, common colds, strep throat... stuff you take to a regular Dr. So the facilities tax payers have contributed to so its there in the event of an emergency is over-run. A nurse came outside after a half hour and walked us around to a side door where they finally treated my sons foot.

              This little passage shows just how easily it is to abuse a law like this, and how quickly it will happen. How do you know these people were in the country illegally? Did you ask them all? Did you check their papers? How do you even know what's wrong with them? If you can so quickly diagnose them all with the common cold, then perhaps you should get a job working at that hospital, because you're a fucking genius with some kind of magical powers. If it's really that easy, then they wouldn't be clogging up the ER, since the people staffed there would be able to treat them just as quickly as you did.

              You are putting yourself above other people in this country and using legality of immigration or color of skin as a justification. Thank god not everyone is like you, and the country's system of government gives everyone equal protections under the law.

              You "sincerely hope" that the law will be abused. What a joke! I sincerely hope that you go fuck yourself and stop thinking you are more deserving than everyone else.

        • by Hooya (518216) on Wednesday April 28, 2010 @01:26AM (#32009852) Homepage

          Here's an interesting story for you:

          Some fifteen years ago, I was one of the three "foreign" students in our dorm. I'm brown. The other was Hispanic. Our dorm was more nerdy than most. More social than nerdy really. Most of us hung out in the lounge, played piano, etc.. But for most of the year, there was a guessing game going on as to who the third foreigner was. No one could figure it out. Towards the end of the year, it came to light that it was this girl - who was hanging out with us ALL THIS TIME when we were trying to guess who it was. Now, the ONLY difference between me and this girl (apart from the anatomical differences between a dude and a dudette) was that I'm brown and she was nordic. Neither of us had an accent or other tell-tale signs of 'foreign-ness'. Yet, people pegged me as a foreigner without blinking. No one - and I mean no one - guessed her.

          I'm now a citizen. I would imagine by now she is too. If both of us are driving down a highway in Arizona guess who will be stopped? Guess who has to carry documentation on his/her person at all times. "Papriska, please?" (think Red-October)

          Fine. If Arizona is just enforcing the fed law, tell me how they can enforce it EQUALLY and I mean non-racially. Would they ever stop this girl and ask for her papers? Would they ever stop me and ask me for mine? On what basis? If your answer is anything other than the perma-tan-age of my epidermis ... The point of the above anecdote is that people start out with the assumption that I'm a foreigner (btw, my son isn't. but he isn't going to fare much better.) Yet no one "sees" other foreigners just like me if they don't look quite like me.

          I know it's a bunch of hypotheticals (would they? who knows). But the point is that as a minority I already have to tread carefully. In AZs case, I have to not only avoid drawing suspicion, I have to carry docs - just in case I get pulled over. Midnight run to taco bell? Umm... where's the passport honey? Fuck that noise. And fuck AZ. Hide behind the justification of "it's the law" all you want. All kinds of things have been "the law" at some point or another. Don't mean it's right.

      • by jackchance (947926) on Wednesday April 28, 2010 @12:52AM (#32009514) Homepage

        Getting arrested or detained does not make you guilty. You'll still have your day in court or clear things up at the station.Think of it like a beefed up curfew law for minors.

        Getting detained doesn't make you guilty, but you could lose your job for not showing up at work.

    • by BountyX (1227176) on Wednesday April 28, 2010 @12:12AM (#32009042)
      I think you are misunderstanding that presumption. You are innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. Anyone can accuse you of any crime at any time. Being temporarily detained or arrested until get a trial, is NOT a presumption of guilt. You have the presumption of innocence in court becuase it is the prosecuting party that assumes the burden of proof for their accusation.
    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by DesScorp (410532)

      Whatever happened to "presumed innocent until proven guilty"?

      Has anyone else noticed that laws seem to be slowly changing to produce a presumption of guilt (requiring a proof of innocence) these days?

      Non-citizens do not have all of the rights that a citizen does. And frankly, I don't see what the big deal here is. In most places in the world... the first world included... visitors are required to have documentation on them of some kind, be it visa papers or a passport.

      • by Foobar of Borg (690622) on Wednesday April 28, 2010 @12:28AM (#32009220)

        Non-citizens do not have all of the rights that a citizen does. And frankly, I don't see what the big deal here is. In most places in the world... the first world included... visitors are required to have documentation on them of some kind, be it visa papers or a passport.

        You seem to have missed the point that not everyone with brown skin in Arizona is an alien, legal or otherwise. Or, to put it another way, if I took my aunt who was born in Germany (but is now an American citizen) to Arizona, they are probably not going to stop her and demand to see her papers to prove that she is here legally.

        • by causality (777677) on Wednesday April 28, 2010 @01:51AM (#32010088)

          Non-citizens do not have all of the rights that a citizen does. And frankly, I don't see what the big deal here is. In most places in the world... the first world included... visitors are required to have documentation on them of some kind, be it visa papers or a passport.

          You seem to have missed the point that not everyone with brown skin in Arizona is an alien, legal or otherwise. Or, to put it another way, if I took my aunt who was born in Germany (but is now an American citizen) to Arizona, they are probably not going to stop her and demand to see her papers to prove that she is here legally.

          And if we had a big problem with literally tens of millions of Germans sneaking into this country by illegally crossing its borders, then maybe I'd see your point.

      • by Trepidity (597) <delirium-slashdo ... org minus author> on Wednesday April 28, 2010 @12:31AM (#32009262)

        Technically yes, but those requirements usually aren't strictly enforced. I don't usually carry my passport on my person in foreign countries, because it greatly increases the risk of it being damaged/lost/stolen. Especially if you go to the beach; are you supposed to take it swimming with you, or leave it unprotected under a beach umbrella? I've never heard of tourists being arrested for that, either, at least in relatively sane western countries. If you get stopped for some reason and tell the policeman that your passport is back in the safe at your hotel, they'll either just take your word for it, or follow you back to your hotel to get it. They won't charge you with a criminal not-carrying-passport offense, because that would be stupid.

        And in the U.S., permanent residents typically aren't hassled, at least until now. Officially a green-card holder needs to carry their green card with them, but in practice this has never really been enforced in an onerous way. My mom was a permanent resident for decades before eventually getting around to getting citizenship, and I don't think she was ever asked to show her green card outside of circumstances where it was clearly necessary, like upon reentry into the U.S., I-9 employment verification, or other such bureaucratic stuff. She certainly didn't carry it while jogging.

        • " And in the U.S., permanent residents typically aren't hassled, at least until now. "

          And if that happens, you can blame three parties for that in the US; the federal government, which has to a great extent ignored the problem of illegal immigration, the politicians that want them to continue ignoring the porous borders, and the businesses that keep them coming because they don't want to pay market rates for labor. Don't blame the people who finally got fed up with coyotes leading columns of illegal aliens across their lawns at 2 in the morning. The states are acting now because the federals are not.

      • by adelporto (104675) on Wednesday April 28, 2010 @12:37AM (#32009336) Homepage

        So you're fine with being asked to provide proof of citizenship during a routine traffic stop? Keep in mind that your driver's license isn't proof of citizenship. Given that the US is a country of immigrants and therefore anyone and everyone looks like an immigrant, police can detain you until you prove that you are a citizen. You obviously don't care if that happens to brown citizens going about their day, because, and this is a wild guess, you're white and don't think this law would affect you, but think for a second about what that means if you happen to be protesting something the government doesn't like. Can't prove your citizenship? Detention for you.

      • by still cynical (17020) on Wednesday April 28, 2010 @01:00AM (#32009594) Homepage

        Non-citizens do not have all of the rights that a citizen does. And frankly, I don't see what the big deal here is. In most places in the world... the first world included... visitors are required to have documentation on them of some kind, be it visa papers or a passport.

        But what about non-visitors? US citizens don't carry birth certificates or passports with them every day, nor are they required to. So how do they prove their citizenship when stopped? Would they just be detained until they can have someone bring their passport to the local jail? No one seems too concerned with that scenario because of the unspoken assumption that anyone who "looked" like a citizen wouldn't be stopped. And that's where the concerns of discrimination come into play. I'm sure the vast majority of people who support this law are confident they won't be stopped and asked for proof of citizenship because they are "obviously" American. Of course, if they're wrong they're going to be very unhappy to find that a driver's license isn't even close to documentation of citizenship.

    • by onefriedrice (1171917) on Wednesday April 28, 2010 @12:23AM (#32009168)

      Whatever happened to "presumed innocent until proven guilty"?

      Has anyone else noticed that laws seem to be slowly changing to produce a presumption of guilt (requiring a proof of innocence) these days?

      As usual, the media has portrayed this bill according to whatever political slant the news outlets see fit. In reality, the Arizona bill is not much different than the federal law on illegal immigration (which obviously just isn't enforced). In particular, more than a few pundits are trying to portray this law as giving law officers the power to go door-to-door in search of illegal aliens to bust. In actuality, there is no such powers, and officers may only ask for papers if there is an altercation. In that case, since officers usually ask to see ID's of any involved persons during any dispute on the street, nobody should have a problem with the Arizona law unless they're trying to make a big deal out of nothing. Clearly, the reason this law is getting so much negative attention is because it makes the President look bad to have states enact laws to enforce federal laws that aren't being enforced.

      There are more points to the issue, though. The residents of Arizona overwhelmingly support it because the fact is (although many want to ignore this), illegal immigration is a big problem, economically and socially. As much as people like to avoid talking about this, a huge chunk of crime (especially violent crime) is caused by Spanish-speakers, many of whom are here illegally. I don't blame them! Or at least, I can see the problem they're in. Illegal immigration is akin to slavery, pure and simple. Humans deserve better, which is why this problem needs to be fixed. If nothing else, at least the Arizona law has made it an issue the federal government now wants to address.

      The simplest thing we can do to fix this problem is to make it easier to immigrate here legally. Talking about amnesty or anything regarding what to do about illegals who are already here is like bailing water without stopping to fix the hole. If it's easy to immigrate here, more of those who would be illegals become tax-paying, fairly-payed citizens. Then we can work to help illegal aliens who are already here find their way to the back of the line. The longer we wait, the longer this modern form of slavery is going to continue.

  • Quite reasonable (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Kelbear (870538) on Tuesday April 27, 2010 @07:50PM (#32006352)

    No worries, they would only would only stop people if they have "reasonable" suspicion. As long as you make sure you appear reasonably white you'll be fine.

    http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/mon-april-26-2010/law---border [thedailyshow.com]

  • Uh... contradictory? (Score:5, Informative)

    by mysidia (191772) on Wednesday April 28, 2010 @12:03AM (#32008954)

    Federal immigration law requires that all non-US citizens, including H-1B workers, to carry documentation, but 'no state until Arizona has made it a crime to not have that paperwork on your person,'

    So it already was a crime.

    The real news is a state is now making an effort to enforce the law, since the executive branch of the federal government has quite clearly failed to fulfill their constitutional duties on the matter, in regards to enforcing the US borders.

    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by fredjh (1602699)

      Moreover... they can't just ask you for no reason, there has to be reasonable suspicion, and on top of that, it's already written into the bill that they must obey existing law: skin color, race, or country of origin is NOT acceptable for reason of suspicion.

      The reaction to this bill is WAY overblown; it's pretty ridiculous... as pointed out, it's not even a new law regarding immigration, it's a new law to simply encourage enforcement.

      I know some of you want us to just take everybody that strolls in, but ri

    • by BountyX (1227176) on Wednesday April 28, 2010 @12:21AM (#32009134)
      While your point is valid...I think the bigger issue with enforcment is how it effects the citezenry. Warning (here comes a hypothetical): What if you are a citizen but speak accented english, or you prefer to speak another language. A cop suspects you are an immigrant and demands immigration papers. Does the cop detain you at that point? Do you need to carry papers to prove citizenship on demand? Does this lead to frequent detention? It just seems unreasonable and ambigous to enforce something like this without encroaching the rights of citizens.
      • by Sycraft-fu (314770) on Wednesday April 28, 2010 @01:08AM (#32009684)

        The bill doesn't require citizens to carry documents, it can't, that'd be illegal. So you have the problem that more or less you'd have to take someone at their word. Now while you may argue that smart enforcement of it could be useful, that isn't what will happen. What will happen is Arizona is going to get on the losing end of a federal civil rights lawsuit:

        A racist cop (because there are some police that are racists, just like any other segment of the population) is going to decide that someone is brown enough that they must be an immigrant and has done something allegedly suspicious demand their papers. Said person, who is a citizen, will tell them to fuck off. They arrest him. Turns out, like many people, he doesn't have ready access to documents to prove his citizenship so he's held in jail for some time. Citizenship is established, he goes free. He files suit against Arizona for violating his rights, since citizens are not required to carry proof of citizenship. Arizona loses money they really do not have.

        That is a real problem here.

    • by 0xdeadbeef (28836) on Wednesday April 28, 2010 @12:22AM (#32009146) Homepage Journal

      They need a new law to enforce the law that is already a law? That don't make no sense.

      Just to piss you people off, we should open the borders. If goods and capital can move freely, why shouldn't cheap labor? The world is flat, get used to it.

    • by pilsner.urquell (734632) on Wednesday April 28, 2010 @12:23AM (#32009152)
      Final version of the law [azleg.gov]. There is a lot of misconceptions and wild rumors circulating about this legislation. This article [espressopundit.com] points out a few of them.
    • by Trepidity (597)

      It wasn't actually a crime. Federal law "requires" it, but not carrying your documentation on you is not a federal criminal offense. The usual practice, if you forgot your green card at home, is that the officer just follows you home while you get it. They don't charge you with a crime.

  • grand experiemnt (Score:5, Interesting)

    by fermion (181285) on Wednesday April 28, 2010 @12:12AM (#32009036) Homepage Journal
    Arizona is embarking on a grand experiment, and as a free state it should be allowed to so do. We have heard the hypothesis that undocumented persons cause so much social and financial harm that any measure to thwart such persons from entering the state. Some would go as far as saying that even documented foreigners should be extremely limited as they take our jobs.

    I fully support Arizona in this experiment. I suspect the reason they have done this is because, unlike other border states like Texas and New Mexico( all three of which showed incredible job growth pre-2009), Arizona now has the county with the highest percentage job loss in the country. I am sure scaring foreign visitors to Texas and New Mexico, instead of Arizona, to shop at the stores, pay sales tax, eat at the restaurants, and even take helicopter rides from the airport to our shopping malls, will help their economy greatly. The kids may even go to university and settle down to engineering jobs that pay huge amounts of payroll and income tax. So far, at least in Texas, it has worked well.

    But that is fine. If Arizona thinks that foreign money has negative value due to documentation or the blight of having people looking for work instead of playing video games or skin color(arizona is the only of the three states that is majority white non-hispanic) or whatever, so be it. We will see if they can achieve economic growth in an isolationist environment. Given that they have one of the highest federal support rate in the country, I doubt it.

  • by Trip6 (1184883) on Wednesday April 28, 2010 @12:13AM (#32009048)

    This law so clearly violates the fourth amendment that it will never hold up when the inevitable challenge comes in the courts. Some have predicted it will go all the way to the SCOTUS but I don't see it getting nearly so far.

    • by DesScorp (410532) <DesScorp@NOsPam.Gmail.com> on Wednesday April 28, 2010 @12:29AM (#32009244) Homepage Journal

      This law so clearly violates the fourth amendment that it will never hold up when the inevitable challenge comes in the courts. Some have predicted it will go all the way to the SCOTUS but I don't see it getting nearly so far.

      Good luck with that. This law largely mirrors existing federal law, which has been tested and found constitutional. The only hope you have of overturning it is, ironically, with a variation of the 10th Amendment; the argument that in this case, a state is usurping a federal role, not the other way around. The chances of this being tossed on 4th amendment grounds are nil.

  • So what? (Score:4, Informative)

    by OrangeTide (124937) on Wednesday April 28, 2010 @12:14AM (#32009058) Homepage Journal

    When I visit Canada, China, etc. If I don't have my passport with me, and an official requires it of me I could be detained and eventually handed off to my government to get new papers or explain to them where my papers are located.

  • by blind biker (1066130) on Wednesday April 28, 2010 @12:19AM (#32009116) Journal

    And I live in a pretty laid-back country, too (Finland). Arizona is just trying to enforce the existing law. That is not a tragedy. It's a tragedy if it's done inconsistently.

  • by mveloso (325617) on Wednesday April 28, 2010 @12:20AM (#32009124)

    I'm not sure why everyone's panties are getting bunched up. As the header states, Federal law already requires you to carry your visa around with you. People on H1B, tourist, and educational visas shouldn't have problems.

    The issue will really hit illegals and US citizens. Citizens generally don't carry documentation around with them. Illegals generally have no documentation, or fake documentation. There's really no way to tell a non-english speaking citizen from a non-english speaking illegal. What'll probably happen is something like this:

    Police: are you a US citizen?
    Potential perp: si
    Police: well then.

    In general, the police have better things to do than walk around randomly asking people for their papers. The law really just allows them to export illegal immigrant criminals to other jurisdictions, saving the state of AZ money.

  • by srothroc (733160) on Wednesday April 28, 2010 @12:28AM (#32009222) Homepage
    Japan does this already; people are required to carry their foreigner ID cards or passports while they're in the country. Failure to be able to present them can lead to a visit to the police station or jail. Some areas have lots of people who report being checked for absolutely no apparent reason at all; foreigners in other areas have never experienced this.

    Honestly, it doesn't bother me. For me, having my wallet or ID with me when I go out is just common sense... not some kind of panty-twisting injustice that I have to carry like a ball-and-chain. It's just common sense.

    So I don't see what the big deal is. Now, on the other hand, if people are just stopped randomly on the basis of their appearance and not because of anything in particular they were doing, then yes, that would bother me. That bothers me in Japan, too. But having to carry an ID? Not a big deal -- you should be doing it already.
    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      Do you carry your ID when you take out the garbage? While in a sento? Part of the problem with the Japanese law is that it doesn't make clear reasonable exceptions to this rule. If you are just outside your house without your ID will you be allowed to go back inside to get it?

      Also, what if you are a Japanese-citizen with non-typical appearance for Japanese? You'll probably end up having to carry ID to prove your citizenship. Same with the law in Arizona.

  • by eloquent_loser (542470) <eloquentloser@h o t m a il.com> on Wednesday April 28, 2010 @12:31AM (#32009260) Journal
    I find it strange that the article doesn't discuss the implications for normal U.S citizens, i.e how do you prove you are *not* a H-1B worker? You can't tell a citizen from a non-citizen if neither of them are carrying anything. Obviously no-one who merely arouses the suspicion of police wants to be detained, therefore this constitutes a defacto requirement for every citizen to carry papers.

One small step for man, one giant stumble for mankind.

Working...